tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News March 27, 2012 1:00pm-2:00pm PDT
>>neil: justice anthony tea partyer? not quite. we are on the shocker in washington right now. welcome, everyone, i am neil cavuto and did the supreme court swing vote on health care tip his hand on health care in what was a shock to the obama administration justice kennedy saying the government has and i quote, "a heavy burden of justification to show where the constitution the authorizes congress to change the relation of individuals to the government." in english, not so fast on this mandatory coverage thing. and these two tea partyers maybe justice not so ambiguous. with me from outside the supreme
court, my guests. did justice kennedy say this mandate is a mess? >>guest: he said he is going down the right path. you do not just get the white house and the congress when day and decide you will rearrange the relationship between the american people and their government. this is 200 years plus in the making you do not one day decide because you are smarter and better than anyone to change and i appreciate what the justice are tag about right way to of my. we hope we take it law and shoot down this law. >>neil: i have heard from a lot of lawyer whose say never try to glean too much, but, anna, from what you heard from justice kennedy and the others, by the way, from those who could be liberal on this key issue, what do you make of that? >>guest: well, this is unduly burdensome on the american people, and i came, i chose this nation as my home, i came from a different country like so many in the united states and we came here for the freedoms this
country provide. we did not come here to live under a dictatorship, with the government entrueding in our likes and this is the biggest power grab in the history of the united states of america. and it needs to be found unconstitutional and then repealed. >>neil: we will take this up with a senator of a different idea on this, a republican, by, what the administration was trying to argue through its lawyers, today, before the justices, was that the reason why the costs are going up because the mandatory coverage has not kicked in, everyone pays in, the costs do not go up, and everyone will be pleased. how does the tea party feel about that? >>guest: look, we both know they manipulated the budget so when the congressional budget office came out with their estimates it looked like obamacare was saving money but that was the theory. we know about theory, like communism it sounds good in theory. but that cost us trillions and trillions of dollars and the law has not started. this is a burden on all
americans but it is an absolute war on women. women. women would run 30 percent of the businesses in america. women on make 80 percent of the health care decisions. women would run the households across this nation, you want the war on women? it is being done by the president of the united states. he is presiding over that war. >>neil: what we are reading from the justices today, including justice kennedy, that whatever their fondness for the government doing what it has to do at certain times, in their opinion, this might not be one of those types, and it may not reach the level at which, for example, addressing racism in the past, this does not get equated with that. if that is the case, this law is dead. right? >>guest: yes, absolutely, this law needs to be killed and what is happening in america today especially with us fighting with obamacare is showing us what our mission truly is in 2012.
we need to get president obama out of the white house, we need to win the senate back and bring conservative principles back to this country because, otherwise, we will end up like all the other nations throughout europe, through lat inamerica and where do we go? there is no other place like the united states of america and president obama is killing american exceptional e under our nose. >>neil: i will put you both down as "doubtful," on the health care law. do you think, then, this sets the tea leaves for a supreme court that follows the sentiment of americans in disapproving this, that the administration could use this to their advantage, saying we tried, we looked out for you and tried to do something to protect you and those tea partyers like you two, they stopped us and changed this. in other words, it works to their advantage? >>guest: look, the obama administration is so desperate going in to november of 2012 they use their own grandmother
and throw her under the bus in order to get elected. they blame the tea party for egg. i know where gem my hoffa is, give me a call. the tea party is responsible for everything. everything. everything is our fault. you know what i fine remarkable? the president of the united states, we promised to heal the water and the ocean, he can't take responsibility for one blasted thing that is happening in the country but he was going to heal us? this is ridiculous. he can try and use the health care law but people see and the supreme court line of questioning is so beautiful because it goes back to what the tea party said all along, what does the issue constitution do? it protects us as individuals which people fought for. it does not protect races, classes, scene door or groups but it protects individuals and about the individual relationship, they are beholden to us. >> where is president obama? should he celebrate the two year anniversary of this? we should be wearing black rather than red today. we should be mourning what is happening to the united states and we will turn this around.
because this is not found unconstitutional well be up a cream. >> i have a cake if he wants to celebrate, come on, m. join us. we are here. i don't even think she in america today. >>neil: no, he is not and i doubt he would want to spend much time with either of you but thank you both, ladies, very much. the tea party is well represented outside the supreme court today. the white house arguing that mandate, that will keep costs to taxpayers down and my guest says try focusing open the costs this have gone way up. we have a senator and a doctor. senator, everyone pays the coverage, but before the coverage premiums can not help but go down and premiums have been going up. they argue they are going up because not everyone is paying in and you argue because of the monstrosity to come? >>guest: i was in the courtroom today, it is the main
event if health care debate and what i see because of all the mandates, the cost of care is going up faster than if the health care law was not passed at all and you showed that "new york times" survey, when they ask people if things were better or worse with health care they are saying it will be worse. you say will you pay more or less for the health care law, overwhelmingly people say they will pay more and you ask about the quality offed care, more people believe they will get worse care than better care so all in all this is bad for paints and bad for the providers who take care those patients and terrible for taxpayers. >>neil: what they have said, senator, is that if this goes down, say, in june they veto strike down the mandate issue, killing it, effectively, that is my read, democrats could say, well, republicans stepped something that was going to
benefit most americans. how do you deal with that? >>guest: well, why think this is going to benefit most americans and most americans don't believe it will benefit them. and i do hope that the we -- the supreme court strikes this health care law. only 24 percent of americans say they should uphold all of the health care law. the government doesn't have a right to come in to our homes and man data we have to buy a product the >>neil: is it your sense, then, sir, that to this mandate provision is slapped down by the court, that the health care law itself is slapped down, or could it live on in a frankenstein kind of role? >>guest: that is the debate tomorrow. they will have two hours of discussion in the supreme court tomorrow and part of it on if the mandate falls which i believe it should, should the entire health care law fall and i believe that should, as well, and they will discuss that and
there will be debating on medicaid the mandate from washington that tells all of the states they have to spend all of this money adding new people on to the medicaid roles, something that is going to bankrupt many states. it is the mother of all unfunded mandates. >>neil: we will watch closely county senator, thank you again. >>guest: thank you for having me. >>neil: a multimillion dollar bullet train from the middle of the desert so las vegas. the desert so las vegas. stay tuned.a very affordable product
laces? really? slip-on's the way to go. more people do that, security would be like -- there's no charge for the bag. thanks. i know a quiet little place where we can get some work done. there's a three-prong plug. i have club passes. [ male announcer ] get the mileage card with special perks on united, like a free checked bag, united club passes, and priority boarding. thanks. ♪ okay. what's your secret? [ male announcer ] the united mileageplus explorer card. get it and you're in.
>>neil: are taxpayers about to bite the bullet? you heard of the bridge to nowhere and critics cause the bullet train to morning and the project that is close to getting $4.9 billion loan from washington, the destination is las vegas going from california. as for where the train originates, though, right here. in the desert, 100 miles from los angeles. and my guest calls this plan laughable. it looks like, tom, that much ado about nothing because the site of where to train could bepart is a good hour away from los angeles, right? so you would have to drive to this site where most of a lot of, you know, las vegas bound californians originate, not all, but host. what is the point? >>guest: well, from a business point of view, it makes though sense at all.
when you study what makes a successful passenger rail movement what you get is a good feeder system. if you think of bart in san francisco and the metro in atlanta. >>neil: when you are on there, the train can go up to 150 miles per hour and the difference in town allowing for driving from los angeles, to, get to victorville to take the bullet train to las vegas, the difference ends up being, really, an hour, right? >>guest: that is correct. >>neil: so ... for $5 billion we are shaving an hour off of 4 1/2 hour trip? >>guest: yes. >>neil: so, who could have possibly have written off on
this? >>guest: i have no idea but it was someone that clearly didn't know much about passenger trains. or economics. >>neil: obviously those are building it and putting it together and the community, victorville would benefit but that is it but i would almost look at it as potentially worthwhile, tom, if it cuts the time if half, like the concord you would my to london in half the time it would normally take, and that is a good barometer not that you can justify the price of these things but you making a for start if you cut my travel time in half. here, you are cutting it, maybe, 20 percent. tops. tops. right? >>guest: you are cutting your travel time in half if you make the train. recall that the train is a single departure. >>neil: one a day?
>>guest: that has not been clear from the planning of how many departures it would be but if i was driving 80 miles from downtown los angeles to victorville and i missed that train and i had to make were the next train i would keep driving. >>neil: you are being cynical. cynical. you are assuming that there is traffic if los angeles and that would happen. >>guest: i'm assuming, that is right, shame on me. >>neil: so this is fait accompli, a done deal. how many will take advantage? >>guest: that is another thing, trains to vacation different nations are, part of a cycle. when the economy is go you get a lot people. when it is bad, the rain is not used anymore. so what happens then in and what are the alternative uses of the funds? >>neil: i can picture this
thing stopping and breaking in the middle of the desert, a summer day, 150 degrees, a bad 4:30 movie. we will watch it closely. thank you very were. first the bashing. >> a hip cat. >> death spiral. >> full of [blank]. >> romney is desperate. will until now, they have had enough. ok, guys-- what's next ?
chocolate lemonade ? susie's lemonade... the movi or... we make it pink ! with these 4g lte tablets, you can do business at lightning-fast spes. we'll take all the strawberries, dave. you got it, kid. we have a winner. we're definitely gonna need another one. small sinesses that want to grow use 4g lte technology from verizon. i wonder how she does it. that's why she's the boss. because the small business with the best tecology rules. contact the verizon center for customers with disabilities at 1-800-974-6006.
>> here comes the little king. >> i see it and it is full of [blank]. will until unlikely to change, no slap is too slight, for sleight to fall, one candidate fires attack ad and the next has a bigger attack ad, all nasty, all the time. enough to make men god squirm and make a pastor with 30,000 members strong, stop, because the latest best seller is what the texas pastor is urging readers. stop. let it go. the name of his latest book, a guy would led a prayer breakfast for president obama and toured devastation with president bush but i will embarrass him on political points so he goes running to confession after
this. >>guest: good luck. >>neil: pastor thank you for coming. what do you think of the language, of the tone out there, the campaign, the way we talk to each other. >>guest: i realize that politics is rough and tumble so i try to avoid it but it has reached an all-time low and at a critical time in our history, but we really need the elected officials and those that are campaigning to really not sabotage the thinking of american people by distracting them into the newans we will never agree. we need people who are focused on issues and not individuals and, really, present solutions and not conflicts. >>neil: but if someone's solutions are ripped apart on their factual level. romney was here not too long ago and he said i'm not distorting rick santorum's record. i'm not distorting newt
gingrich's record, i am just citing what the record is. and they think it is a negative ad. >>guest: well, records are open game and they are up for scrutiny. committeen more importantly than previous records i am wanting to hear what they would do in office, the specificity of the solutions and how that resonates with the american people. i welcome the discourse but it is possible for adults to disagree without being obnoxious. >>neil: certainly you have not watched cable news. but do you get a sense though, that is just impossible? i don't want to be too cynical but i talk to political handler whose say negative ads, they work. they work. >>guest: they do work. we have to take a look not just at politicans but our society, in general, that we have lost our ability to have true discussion and true debate. we all want america to succeed. we disagree about the best way
to go about and it that makes america great. >>neil: they remember the last negative thing said so unless you respond, people believe it. >>guest: the gangs are out-of-control. it is out of the control. we need to let it go. >>neil: one of the things you argue, we get caught up in this, and you tell a lot of great stories here, but the problem is too many of us chickens rather than flying as eagles. eagles soar while chickens are picking at ground. why is there a predisposition? >>guest: forgiveness, the book is about forgiveness which is a big idea. it is for people who have a tendency to look beyond the individual circumstances to the bigger picture of where they are trying to go. sometimes we get so caught up not just congress and politicians but, i mean, husbands, wives, people going through divorce you are busy trying to get even you do not see what you are doing to your children. you are so busy proving to prove
--. >>neil: there is nothing, you do not forget stuff that was said. or do you not hold a grudge? >>guest: the goal is not to forget. the goal is not to carry the anger and the hostility to get what is good out of the experience and let the rest of it go and we all have an opportunity to do that but we don't office den take that chance. >>neil: but is it not true that women remember every slight? >>guest: i don't know about that but you remember what you are wearing. >>neil: you talk about the responsibility of human beings, those who have been given a great deal, you talk about how god wants those of us who have influence and authority to monitor how we extend mercy and kindness and the bible says you measure so you can help others
again. so i guess what i interpret from that is you would be open to the argument that the rich or those better off, should give more because they are better off. >>guest: what i am saying in the book is not just speaking of wealth but influence in general, influence and opportunity. we cannot in a vacuum take care of ourselves and disregard those around us. we live in a society today that we built more and more gated communities trying to protect ourselves from elements outside of the gated communities and you have to ask, who is in prison? if we don't bring about a sense of equality and i am not talking about socialism, our focus on ourselves will put us in a prison to the chagrin of everything we hope to build and we ought to do it for that reason and because it is right. >>neil: do you think god has given you a great deal that old
saw, rich guy getting into heaven -- >>guest: money is nebulous. it is what you do. >>neil: but you argue the rich should do more to help? >>guest: we have do do more. the rich is to give more to make things better. >>neil: so republic would pay more taxes? >>guest: intellectuals have to do more to --. >>neil: does god want us to pay more taxes? >>guest: i don't know about that. >>neil: is god a democrat or republican? >>guest: i hope he is never. i hope he is above all of that. >>neil: but what you say which is an attack on our society, you talk about the budget and when you get off track you do not throw the budget out the window because you overspend one
weekend but we have this as a problem so how do we get back on track? ing by setting common goals and working together. we are so busy trying to get power we are not trying to make the country better. we are joking -- jockeying for power. we have the best and brightest mines to do that but our focus is who is in control. who gets the credit. if we are going do take this country further into the future we have to drop our lust for power and be concerned about the country we say we love. i am worried about my grandchild. i'm worried about the future not because we don't have bright minds but because we never are called to work together. >>neil: will we ever have a generation, you talk about your grandmother and being there and how security and cozy that was, i wonder if we will ever get those days back. >>guest: i don't think they will come back naturally we have to do them intentionally.
success is always intentional. and we have to aggressive. we have to agree we want it. i welcome the discourse of how we get there. that makes america great. >>neil: but we are discoursing too much. >>guest: we are discoursing though solution. >>neil: why don't you all just shut up. >>guest: i never say that. maybe a time or two but they for give me. we should deal with tough issues and we should duke it out, but now we are fighting to be fighting. >>neil: well when you say let it go, when you say forgive, it is a very popular line and you give examples, you can do well doing it, but it is engrained in our culture never to do that. because it is a sign of weakness. >>guest: you are exactly right and that is exactly why i wrote the book. we applaud people for being obnoxious and we didn't used to
do that. it was considered abhorrent to be inappropriate and scream out while someone was talking now it is applauded. where are we going with this? and it would be one thing if it were just on division but it is in the messages. in our schools. in our church board meetings and worst of all, it is in our heart. if you don't have peace in your heart and you allow past tragedies to destroy future opportunities, the real hell comes from your own heart and when i say let it go i am not sure i am talking about the nation or the president, i am talking about you. >>neil: you are in an argument with your wife and you know you are right and she says the opposite. >>guest: i will defend my point, what i am concerned about when you are still talking about it next week and still angry a year from now. there is nothing wrong with being angry, but the bible says anger is in the bosom of fools, when it stays in heart it becomes a cancer in your soul
cannot be contained. [ clang ] the all-new 2013 lexus gs. there's no going back. see your lexus dealer. and i thought "i can't do this, it's just too hard." then there was a moment. when i decided to find a way to keep going. go for olympic gold and go to college too. [ male announcer ] every day we help students earn their bachelor's or master's degree for tomorrow's careers. this is your moment. let nothing stand in your way. devry university, proud to support the education of our u.s. olympic team.
on december 21st, polar shifts will reverse the earth's gravitational pull and hurtle us all into space, which would render retirement planning unnecessary. but say the sun rises on december 22nd and you still need to retire, td ameritrade's investment consultants can help you build a plan that fits your life. we'll even throw in up to $600 when you open a new account or roll over an old 401(k). so who's in control now, mayans?
>>neil: and the pain at pump is pinching our pocketbooks and the consumer confidence slipping and bass -- gas prices close to $4. and a pollster saying that should make the president feel less confident. but, david, i guess the white house argues and this will not last, the gas thing will not last forever but your argument is that once it feeds into our system, although the gas prices come down it already is, right? >>guest: it sure is. less discretionary income at the end of the day and it means less spending, consumer spending goes down and affects the market and ripples. >>neil: their argument will be it is short-lived and gas as a pentagon of what we spend, disposable spending is not what it was so not quite a gas price experience. what do you thing? >>guest: what we will see is fluctuation. and we actually set a target, we
set $4.50 and we ask the question on the poll yesterday would you vote democrat or republican in october if the price of regular gas was $4.50 a blond and as you know, hawaii is $4.54 and california is $4.33 today. and we noticed a marked decline in people voting democratic. the people voting democratic in the survey declined 11 point from 47 percent to 36 percent and the republican number did not move and undecided exploded to downtown percent so this one issue a high price of gas and $4.50 target is the magic in unis a great equalizer. >>neil: offsetting all the other improvings stats? >>guest: that is true with the poll we covered health care, we covered foreign policy. you name it. the economy. offshore drilling. you name it. and 660 pages from the website but that one question addresses what will level the playing fold in november so it is going to be
watched and it could be inverse relationship between president t obama's poll numbers and the rice of gas. >>neil: history suggests the gas speak dozen not last long even with katrina a few years ago, certainly, and the japan experience, and the egypt uprising when there was just a general moving up of gas prices but this is all right long in the tooth and will invariably go down. do you buy that? >>guest: why think so. precedent is a great backdrop but you are looking at the iran situation which is fragile and a lot of variables and we asked in the poll if the president has a lot, little, somewhat, nor not very much to do with the price of gas and 52 percent of respondents say he had a lot or some influence on the price of gas. so, voters already have a perception that the president can do something about the price of gas but the level of expectation is that the price of
gas will drop it and doesn't, it could be a double edged sword. >>neil: you have been prescient on the race. we will watch closely. both democrats and republicans are next on a deal. hi, i just switched jobs, and i want to roll over my old 401(k) into a fidelity ira. man: okay, no problem. it's easy to get started; i can help you with the paperwork. um...this green line just appeared on my floor. yeah, that's fidelity helping you reach your financial goals. could you hold on a second? it's your money. roll over your old 401(k) into a fidelity ira and take control of your personal economy. this is going to be helpful. call or come in today. fidelity investments. turn here.
>>neil: it is the battle of the budgets, republicans and democrats rolling out new plans to get our financial house in order and yours truly is here. maybe i can broker a deal between the republican, and the top democrat on the budget economy, with his plan. congressman, always a pleasure. >>guest: go to be with you. if you can bring us together that would be great. >>neil: that's what i am here for, anything to help america.
your plan differentiates between the republicans, how? >>guest: well, primarily we take a balanced approach. models after what some of the bipartisan commissioner such as simpson-bowles have done, meaning we reduce the deficit through a combination of cuts. but, also, cuts to a lot of the tax loopholes to deal with it in a balanced way. if you don't use any revenue component you end up whacking seniors on medicare and the medicare guarantee and you slash medicaid which helps seniors in hurricaning homes and you slash education so we --. >>neil: but it doesn't look like you address those? you hang a lot on the revenue, and that is fine, but what is to stop someone from saying they are not addressing entitlements? >>guest: actually, we just had this debate, paul ryan and i in the rules committee in the house, and there was an
agreement our approach would deal with the medicare spending, the question was, how we deal bit, and the republican plan deals with it by putting all the risk of rising health care costs on seniors by giving them the equivalent of a voucher, but the voucher doesn't keep pace with rising health care costs and we take a different approach to reduce health care costs in the system by changing the incentives in medicare to try and focus more on quality of care and the value of care not just the volume of care which is what drives up the cost. >>neil: there are a lot of good includes on ways to fine tune this which is not crazy but here is where i draw a line between all the ideas, as the present health care plan stands assuming the supreme court lets it stand, we will assume that, but medicare will change, right, and it is going to be, you know, out a last money, as we step
toward an alternative system, so, you are both taking some chances here, right? >>guest: well, the issue is how you do that and who birds the risk. so, under the democratic preliminary as i said we have changed some of the incentives so that people get paid based on the coordination of care they provide to a patient not just the quantity of care that patient delivers. under the republican land they give seniors the equivalent of a voucher but the voucher does not keep pace with the rising health care costs so --. >>neil: you do not know that. the art for the voucher is that it will bring in the costs. it could be a specious argument, the president said the same about the health care law it would do the same and it hasn't so you could be right but the idea behind it those costs would come down. you don't see that? >>guest: i don't see that because before we had medicare, before 1965 we had a private health care market for seniors
for people over 65 and not vowsingly despite that competition the insurance companies did not see profit to be made. >>neil: but they are doing so, you are quite right, they are doing this to prepare for taking on those with the conditions and kids, older kids at home with their parents who would have to covers now, so, that is part of the argument, but it is obscene. what i do want to raise with you, finally, sir, the debt issue, because while you are curbing the growth of runaway spending, it is still runaway spending and we will still ask with your plan after 10 years, $6 trillion more in debt than we is new. >>guest: well, neither the republican plan or the democrat plan balances in the ten year window but with both plans they begin to reduce the amount of the deficit as a percent of the
economy, a significant drop. >>neil: i know that but we will still have -- i know, i know, i me and i will say the same to your follow-up guest. we will still have a lot more debt, right? >>guest: lock look the last time we balanced the budget was in 2001 before the back-to-back tax cuts and that is why we need to get back to a balance and there are lots of loopholes in the tax code that need to be closed and we thing folk whose make more than $1 million a year can go back to paying the same rate they paid during the clinton administration. >>neil: and that will take care of this? >>guest: no, no, no, that is why you cannot do it with revenue alone you need a mix of cuts but if you do not do it with any revenue you will be whacking seniors on medicaid and medicaid and gutting benefits on transportation. we did not think you can do it with revenue alone but we need a balanced approach. >>neil: congressman, always a
. >> we are so busy trying to get power we are not sincerely trying to make the country better but jockeying for power. >>neil: we will see if we can get both sides come together, you her the top democratic on his plan, and now the chairman of the republican committee on his plan. ohio congressman with me, right new, congressman, good to have you back. you don't put any emphasize on revenue in your plan, so is your all cuts?
no -- define it. >>guest: we have a simple system that promotes economic growth and lowers the taxes, but when democrats talk of balanced approach they mean tax increases now and, well, we policy we will get do the spending cuts later and americans do not buy that because they have been fooled by that so many times before. so, we do is simple: again, last november 261 members of the house of representatives voted for a balanced budget amendment and our budget proposal is the only one that complies with the requirement if we had it, that we have to balance, ours is the only one that does it balancing in five years and we do two things beings we take discretionary spending back to 2008, the last budget year of nancy pelosi, and back to 2008 and we hole it for five years, something a lot of families and businesses flood do and that gets you a lot of savings and puts you on a path to balance, and we do winner thing different, we take medicaid budget and we say, we will send it to the states at 2012 levels
where we are today, and we are not going to grow it, we will keep it this because we figure with the innovation at the local level they can better serve that population at the state level than we can --. >>neil: say you are right, why, then, while you are at it, if they are hellbent on revenue and they thing you are hellbent on entitlement cutting, but you would not mess with tax rates beget rid of subsidies and credits and the type of thing that have people avoiding paying taxes at all but many tea partyers argue that is a tax hike. >>guest: well not if the lower the rates in you have to offset and you are not increasing the overall tax burden on american businesses. we move to a system that we think is simpler, broader system, lower the rate and create a framework conduce ever
to growth. right now every speech i give when i am asking folks how many think we should throw out the current tax code and everyone raises their hand because any tax code that allows 47 percent of the population not to pay tax is broken. we think you should do that but not in a way that increases the tax burden or that generates new revenue, in a way that create as framework that is truly conducive to grow our economy and promoting economic growth. that is what our plan does. >>neil: a lot of you guys be not as far apart as it would first appear, closer than it appears, but, congressman, thank you very much, good do have you. >>guest: good to be with you. >>neil: you want to know who is going to live here next year? forget prices at the pump. look closer to prices at home. your home.
with these 4g lte tablets, you can do business at lightning-fast spes. we'll take all the strawberries, dave. you got it, kid. we have a winner. we're definitely gonna need another one. small sinesses that want to grow ... i wonder how she does it. that's why she's the boss. because the small business with the best tecology rules. contact the verizon center for customers with disabilities at 1-800-974-6006.
i bathed it in miracles. director: [ sighs ] cut! sorry tinterrupt. when'the show? well, if we don't find an audience, all we'll ever do is rehearse. maybe you should try every door direct mail. just select the zip codes where you want your message to be seen, print it yourself, or we'll help you find a local partner and you find the customers that matter most. brilliant. clifton, show us overjoyed. no, too much. jennessa. ah! a round of applause. [ applause ] [ male announcer ] go online to reacevery home, every address, every time with every door direct mail.
>> neil: well it's housing stupid. with all due respect that focus on jobs and elections and i got gas rises in this election am i am tell you none of that matters as much of the value of folk's homes. it's not that jobs are important or what you pay at the pump is not important but the value of folks' homes is more important. it's how they define or at least a good many homeowners define their wealth. not too long ago their homes were their wealth. not now. and homes prices for fifth straight month is just the beginning. most of americans home wealth has fallen making the first time we've seen that happen. first presidential election over election, down draft i home values has ever happened. at least since they have been recording this stuff.
to be fair to this president this housing decline has been going on a lot longer he has been president. maybe go back to 2008 but 2011 they thought they were going up. more than four years later the lending environment would be tighter today but it is. many say americans have gotten used to this, the homes are gpn an easy staff for cash for college tuition and quick getaway when you had to have it. not so so easy now. that is the difference now. this is the first presidential election in memory where the value of that piggybank is less than it was in the last presidential election. even in 2008 the fall of the housing was so recent it hadn't quite out what happened in 2004
but most definitely this time. i think the affinity for people have for their homes has turned into a financial albatross for those lucky to enough to afford those homes. many are stuck and can't move. many don't make the risk to move. i told the great element that nobody talks about, gas and jobs are more important. i disagree. nothing is getting better under that roof. that is why i speck so many folks are hitting the proof. too many questions whether they are still treading water and not a one from the mainstream media about the many americans who are still under water. home wealth is one of mitt romney wants to renovate and four car garage and elevator.